* ÇöÀç ÄÁÅÙÃ÷ Á¤º¸¸¦ Áغñ Áß¿¡ ÀÖ½À´Ï´Ù.
This article argues for a simple hypothesis of VPE (VP Ellipsis) licensing in English--VPE is licensed only by the first auxiliary verb in both infinitival and finite clauses. This is made possible in...
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Is the contrast between control to and ECM/raising to real with respect to VPE licensing capability?
3. What is the nature of the infinitive to with respect to VPE licensing?
4. Why doesn't the negator not license VPE in infinitival clauses?
5. What is the nonlocal VPE licensing mechanism?
6. Does the sentential not really license VPE in finite clauses?
7. Apparent problems
8. Conclusion
References
ÀúÀÚ¼Ò°³
¤ýMissing Affixes
¤ýÁß±¹¾î µ¿»ç Àü ¸ñÀû¸í»ç±¸ ¹× ¼öµ¿ÇüÅÂ¼Ò ¸í»ç±¸ÀÇ ¿¹¿ÜÀû ¾çÅÂ¿Í ±× ÇÔÃàÀǹÌ
¤ýWhat Do Ellipsis Phenomena Talk about Grammar? First Aux Licensing in English VP Ellipsis
¤ýSequence of Tense and Phase Impenetrability Condition
¤ýFocus Movement in Sluicing
¤ýAn Expletive in Korean
¤ýƯ¼öÁ¶»ç ¡°´Â¡±¿¡ ´ëÇÑ ÅëÇÕÀû ºÐ¼®